SynthesisPloS one2023
Effectiveness of formal onboarding for facilitating organizational socialization: A systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Motivations and challenges experienced among locums working in Norwegian rural general practice: a reflexive thematic analysis.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2026Article
- Research on the Impact of Workaholic Leadership on Newcomer Organizational Socialization.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Impact of a two-year transition programme on patient and nurse perceived missed nursing care - A comparative cross-sectional study.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2026Article
- Professional quality of life among Norwegian oral health professionals working with torture and abuse survivors and patients with severe dental anxiety.Acta odontologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- A multi-agent RAG system for generating SCORM courses from enterprise documents.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Assessment of Structured Tele-Critical Care Training and Its Impact on Clinician's Perceptions of Delivery of Care: A Survey-Based Pilot Study.Critical care explorations · 2026Article
- Creating healthy organizations: an integrated culture of care in high-demand sectors-a qualitative study of private-sector organizations in Sweden.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Enhancing leadership transitions in student-run clinics: a quality improvement initiative to standardise onboarding.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Study on strategies to improve clinical fellow training satisfaction based on importance-performance analysis (IPA).BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Perspectives and Meaning of Role Transition Lived by Experienced Nurses: A Phenomenological Study.Journal of nursing management · 2025Article
- Difficulties Faced by Residents and Clues to Solutions: A Qualitative Study From the Medical Teachers' Perspective.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
- A strategic framework for pathology faculty onboarding.Academic pathologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the effectiveness of formal onboarding programs and practices for new professionals.
introductionNew professionals may experience high levels of stress and uncertainty. Formal onboarding programs and practices aim to facilitate the socialization of new professionals by structuring early experiences. However, there is a lack of evidence-based recommendations of how to onboard new professionals.
methodsThis review considered studies that compares the effect of formal onboarding practices and programs for new professionals between 18-30 years of age (sample mean) to the effect of informal onboarding practices or 'treatment as usual' in professional organizations internationally. The outcome of interest for the review was the extent to which new professionals were socialized. The search strategy aimed to locate both published studies (dating back to year 2006) and studies accepted for publication written in English using the electronic databases Web of Science and Scopus (last search November 9 2021). Titles and abstracts were screened and selected papers were assessed by two independent reviewers against the eligibility criteria. Critical appraisal and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers using Joanna Briggs Institutes templates. The findings were summarized in a narrative synthesis and presented in tables. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluations approach.
resultsFive studies including 1556 new professionals with a mean age of 25 years were included in the study. Most participants were new nurses. The methodological quality was assessed as low to moderate and there were high risks of bias. In three of the five included studies, a statistically significant effect of onboarding practices and programs on new professionals' adjustment could be confirmed (Cohen's d 0.13-1.35). Structured and supported on-the-job training was shown to be the onboarding strategy with the strongest support to date. The certainty of the evidence was rated as low.
conclusionThe results suggests that organizations should prioritize on-the-job training as a strategy to facilitate organizational socialization. For researchers, the results suggest that attention should be given to understanding how to best implement on-the-job training to ensure strong, broad, and lasting effects. Importantly, research of higher methodological quality investigating effects of different onboarding programs and practices is needed. Systematic review registration number: OSF Registries osf.io/awdx6/.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.